New Source Redux: I won't belabor this, since we've been over it before, but the NYT's feature magazine piece, on how Bush is bent on a "radical transformation of the nation's environmental laws, quietly and subtly, by means of regulatory changes and bureaucratic directives," is worth reading if only for the glaring bias.

Easterbrook has a good rebuttal here. He doesn't mention everything worth mentioning. (Like that freeing plants to perform some upgrades without New Source requirements kicking in could not only prove environmentally friendly, since old plants are intentionally left unmodernized due to the perverse incentives of New Source, it would also be more market friendly. Anytime you can get both, you're going to do better than the doomsayers project.) But he covers enough that I think he should write a definitive article on this subject. He's pecked at it on his blog for long enough.